<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: composing messages with x-label



* On 2007.01.11, in <20070111160325.GA15402@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
*       "Thomas Roessler" <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> A colleague's request triggered me into concocting this one
> quickly...  Not in the CVS at this point; comments welcome.

I see X-Label: primarily as a receiver-side feature, not a sender
feature.  Still, that's just a policy matter.  There's no technology
barrier to using it as a sender feature (you can pipe X-Labels: into
an SMTP submission agent), so adding X-Label to the compose menu just
makes it easier to do what you can do anyway.  If I don't want to
receive labels from others I must filter them out during the message
transfer, in either case.  No complaint about the feature, just noting
its properties.

Is there still an objection to
    http://home.uchicago.edu/~dgc/sw/mutt/patch-1.5.11.dgc.xlabel_ext.8
or
    http://home.uchicago.edu/~dgc/sw/mutt/patch-1.5.11.dgc.xlabel_sort.1
?

xlabel_ext allows editing labels at any time, rather than jointly
with composition.  Past objection to this has been that edit-message
is sufficient for editing labels, but xlabel_ext, like the X-label
composition patch, simply makes it substantially easier to do what you
already can do.

xlabel_sort allows sorting the index by labels.

It seems useful to me to apply these alongside your composition patch,
as they are joint functionality.

-- 
 -D.    dgc@xxxxxxxxxxxx        NSIT    University of Chicago